I had that discussion with one of my managers about people giving notice, and I asked him how much notice I would get from him if I were to be fired or laid off. He went into a long explanation of how telling an employee he's getting canned causes all sorts of security problems and low productivity etc etc, to which I pointed out I would give him as much notice as I thought he would give me... Companies expect generosity and loyalty from their employees, but have absolutely no intention of being generous or loyal to their employees. Generous and loyal employees increase company proffit. Generous and loyal companies lower company proffit.
That was a pretty dumb thing to do. The manager gave you the stock answer that he *had* to give you, saying anything else may create a liability for the company. What actually happens when you are laid off depends on how trustworthy you are, it depends on your rapport with management. You just destroyed any that you had. You also moved yourself higher up on the list of people to lay off since you are now considered more of a liability if tough times occur.
I survived numerous layoffs at one employer. When I was laid off I was given two months notice and spent part of that time pairing up with a surviving employee to finish off some features/bugs fixes and getting the survivor familiar with my part of our project. I asked for permission to take home a copy of some of the source code that I had worked on all alone so that if anyone had questions I could use it as a reference when giving them assistance over the phone. My manager did not laugh at my offer, and by my departure the VP of Engineering for the US division of this multinational gave me a letter permitting me to retain the source code for this purpose. Incidentally, they never needed to call, the source code comments were good enough. I'm not saying everyone at this company was treated this way, or that others companies will behave this way, but I am saying that your attitude has created a self fulfilling prophesy where you have assured that you will never receive such consideration.
Also note my experience with getting advanced notice of being laid off is not unique, various other posters are sharing similar experiences.
My local Blockbuster carries both HDDVD and BlueRay. A couple of weeks ago I asked the guys behind the counter what customers were more interested in, they agreed that it was about 3:1 in favor of HD.
Personally I think it is too early to declare a winner. PS/3's "recent" introduction may cause a spike in demand. HDDVD folks may be buying more slowly now that the novelty has worn off, and this will happen with the BlueRay "newcomers" too.
I've had to go through this procedure after a simple re-install, when I haven't made any changes to my PC whatsoever. I was under the impression that re-activation was only not automatic when you had made a major hardware change.
If you reinstalled how does that new installation know the key has been previously activated? The new installation is probably not aware of its past life.
"Yahoo was under fire for recently turning over information to Chinese authorities"
"Microsoft was attacked for removing pages from MSN Spaces China at the behest of the government"
"Google was being criticized for removing political sites from search results displayed to China"
"Cisco was accused of helping to enable Chinese filtering of the Web"
This is a poor list. Turning over identifies and removing/filtering content are vastly different activities. You trivialize the former by lumping it in with the later.
You know what is amazing is that I can use any browser with my bank's online banking software. So I can use any operating system. So I can use any random computer anywhere (friend's, work, library, random internet kiosk at the breckenridge ski resort up on the mountain) And that I never considered that amazing before today.
Perhaps I'm paranoid, but I find it amazing that you would use a random computer to do online banking. Who knows what key logging software has been maliciously installed.
[joke]
ermmm, except that in 1968 Wal-Mart was a 2 year old company that existed only in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Any store that sold a 12 button calculator, working time piece and accepted "metaly money" was a technological giant.:-)
[/joke]
Yeah, I had to re-read the text when I ran across this:
"In 1969, Wal-Mart installed a computer to keep track of inventory in its Bentonville, Arkansas, distributon facility. This initial system evolved into a perpetual inventory-control system, and by the end of the 1970s, Wal-Mart had installed a computer terminal network throughout the United States to link its headquarters, stores, and distribution centers."
"Value Disciplines: 3 Case Examples", Haim Mendelson, Stanford, Graduate School or Business, June 2003, pp 1-30.
I don't think you realize the popularity of Starcrft in South Korea. It's almost a national sport, there are multiple cable TV channels that show tournaments live with play-by-play commentators.
"Knowing what we know about CIOs -- that is, that most are smart, hardworking,...
No argument there.
... supremely aware of how the business works...
No, they are supremely aware of how one segment of the business works. An important segment, but still a limited view.
... and increasingly savvy regarding the workings of external customers' minds...
No, that would probably be sales/marketing or operations depending on the nature of the business.
... the failure of more CIOs to become CEO has to be one of the biggest mysteries of our age."
I'd suggest pondering a company that has been an aggressive and pioneering user of IT since 1969, Wal-Mart. Despite being one of the most consistently successful firms with respect to IT, their long term strategy has been that IT is a temporary assignment. That managers are "merchants first", something else secondarily. Now a side effect of this is perhaps to spread IT knowledge throughout management.
I would argue that business success is largely based upon stategy, and IT is more of an implementor of stategy, not as much a formulator of strategy. IT skills are valuable, but being a people-person, a motivator, a leader, is critical for a CEO. I'd wager that if we took a close look at those CIOs who rose to CEOs we would find a lot of experience outside of IT. One long term stategy for becoming a CEO is to take stretch assignment outside of one's comfort zone, to work in more than one discipline within the company. I expect that CIO was merely the last such assignment, not that someone spent an entire career in IT and became CEO.
Or perhaps this is Microsoft's way of getting their hands on a fairly mature, well-known, linux distribution. MS is not known for what they invent, they're known for what they usurp and rebrand.
No Linux distribution is well known among the public. You are lucky if you can find someone who has heard of Linux in general.
If Microsoft wanted a *NIX they could do the same thing that Sun, SGI, and more recently Apple had done. Just use BSD. Very few users will care if the underpinnings of a *NIX based OS is Linux or BSD. The user will care about the apps, and possibly compatibility with legacy apps. Now Microsoft has some inherent advantages in that regard, far outweighing anything Linux/BSD related, something that could possibly make them a dominant *NIX vendor.
I suppose Walmart wants a stable 100% OS to run their system on...
Wal-Mart installed UNIX-based systems in their stores in 1991. They use common systems and platforms in all their stores world wide. From an IT perspective Wal-Mart has been a pioneering and aggressive user of technology since 1969.
Note: Dell does not support non-Dell installed operating systems.
In short: "We won't even give you tech support for the FreeDOS that comes in the package. All we'll do is replace your hardware if it breaks."
That sounds like support to me. They support what they assembled/installed. Dell support is not a uniform thing, it varies quite a bit from product to product and segment to segment. Give them more money, they will give you more support. Give them even more and they'll send someone to your home/office. Give them alot of money and they'll help you setup your enterprise with custom software and help you keep it running.
Has anyone figured out how much cheaper these computers come than those with OEM Windows? Dell's pricing/models are so scattered I don't even know where to begin.
Why don't you begin by determining what segment these "blank" systems come from, "home / home office", "small business", etc; and then look at comparable "bootable" systems in that same segment. Staying withing the segment helps to make Dell prices a little more comprehensible. When you go between segments there can be radical changes in things that "geeks" sometimes ignore, warranties for example.
My vague recollection from other sources is that Dell charges something around US$50 for Windows XP.
... I love the way all pundits are smarter than jobs, yet the company's track record is amazing (I'm a stock holder since the 90s)...
Being an Apple stockholder is not necessarily a sign of good judgment. It may be a sign of faith, not good analysis. First let me emphasize that stock price is not based on a firm's health, at time there is more speculation than analysis. Apple will undoubtedly be healthy for the foreseeable future and have the cash reserves to finance any necessary adaptations to changing market conditions, however the stock price could easily come crashing down despite good sales. Witness $90 to $80 in December, $70 to $50 in July, $85 to $60 in March,... Holding Apple stock since the 90s suggest a naive investor, taking profits periodically and perhaps repurchasing after a correction that follows a wave of speculation would suggest more sophistication. Apple's stock price incorporates a lot of speculation, Apple may live up to it but that is in part due to failures amongst Apple's competitors, something beyond Apple's control. For example, Apple is more of a digital music player company than a computer company in the eyes of investors. If a competitor were able to introduce a viable iPod competitor, not necessarily better - just competitive, Apple's stock could easily crash.
So where is the piracy hurting that economic sector? I can not see it.
Maybe 5/10 games being of the more casual type, casual gamers being less likely to pirate?
Also, MMORGS are somewhat piracy resistant due to subscriptions.
However most important of all is that this is just a sorted list, piracy affects absolute numbers. Rampant piracy would not mean the there is no top ten, just that the total sales numbers are depressed. It would also be interesting to compare absolute numbers of a subscription based MMORG to the other titles that don't have the piracy resistance. Discrepancies there might reflect piracy to some degree.
It may be cheaper to send robotic missions, but probably not as much fun. For a race serious about exploring a significant fraction of the galaxy...
I'll refer to my second sentence: "Then if anything interesting is found send the "manned" missions." Do you realize how much nothing is out there, where is the "fun" in finding another dead rock just like so many others? Forget the romantic fantasy of spaceflight, it will be uncomfortable, boring, and stressful. With robots doing the scouting there will be a greater number of interesting things for the manned missions to investigate, possible more than could be sent out. Now if manned missions did the initial exploration, the people would largely see nothing of particular interest. I think you are vastly overestimating the novelty of finding another dead rock in space, sure it would interest us, but a generation born after such discoveries become commonplace?
... I doubt if the manned vs unmanned costs are an issue driving the choice of exploration method.
Actually it is a major point of debate, scientists favoring a large number of robotic missions, politicians favoring a handful of manned missions. Manned missions are multiple orders of magnitude more expensive.
I'd hold off on criticizing others for a lack of imagination. Don't you realize that self replicating probes will doom us? We will be galactic spammers, the aliens will wipe us out as a nuisance. Or our probes will harvest the planet they pray towards, the aliens will wipe us out as heretics and blasphemers. At a very minimum the probes will be crossing the border without proper documentation, the fines and impound fees could leave us in "debtors prison" for millennia.
I read some of it and the biggest assumption was that probes would travel at most 1/10 the speed of light.
Well there is the problem of fuel needed to accelerate, and decelerate if you want to stop/slow to look at something interesting. Perhaps a decent strategy would be to send fast movers out to scout, never stop/slow - accelerate only, and have them signal slow movers behind to investigate more interesting things.
We will be in a lot of trouble if the Cylons find us first.
Actually the "cylons" will find us first, it is far cheaper to send robotic explorers out. Then if anything interesting is found send the "manned" missions.
if you're just a voice on concalls and a name on emails, what do you expect?
You got to have at least some face time.
In such a case one has to wonder if the position could just be off-shored? Telecommuting may be a proof-of-concept that a position does not really require personal interaction. If so, why not have a long-distance telecommute rather than a local?
Actually, you are overstating the work which the drug companies engage in. Most of the research is done in academia, under federal funding.
I believe that was the case many decades ago, but I don't think things have worked that way in modern times. Universities like to own patents too, it is a revenue stream for them as well. The work in academia may be more likely to be funded by industry than the feds.
There are two shuttles losses, Columbia in 2003 and Challenger in 1986. In 1986 there was a little excitement among Democrats that they might be able to pin the blame for launching on Reagan. Political behavior has deteriorated since then, and it wasn't all that high in 1986 to begin with.
NASA was paralyzed after Challenger, not just Columbia, probably more paralyzed. Contrast these two with the Apollo 1 fire.
Regarding political opportunism, I think your post exemplifies the modern tendency to do so. *Every* administration views the space program as a status symbol, and both parties have supported the Air Force's desire to militarize space. With respect to risky missions to Mars, *all* missions to Mars are currently risky and given that they are robotic that is not too much of an issue. Their is something worth considering in a "faster cheaper" strategy, faster learning curve, risks can be somewhat managed through redundancy,...
What, repeating vintage 1969 American technology is beyond the reach of 2007 Japan, even though what it has to do to land a person on the Moon is now proven, and the equipment has 30 years of further development?
It's not the tech, it's the human factor. Today, the Apollo landings would be considered too risky, too hazardous for the crew. Back then we would mourn the loss, but essentially say the astronauts volunteered and they knew the risks. Especially given their military and test pilot backgrounds. Today there would be too many political opportunists and lawyers trying to exploit the tragedy, and planners are thus paralyzed by fear, or at best overly cautious.
Slashdot Mirror
I had that discussion with one of my managers about people giving notice, and I asked him how much notice I would get from him if I were to be fired or laid off. He went into a long explanation of how telling an employee he's getting canned causes all sorts of security problems and low productivity etc etc, to which I pointed out I would give him as much notice as I thought he would give me ... Companies expect generosity and loyalty from their employees, but have absolutely no intention of being generous or loyal to their employees. Generous and loyal employees increase company proffit. Generous and loyal companies lower company proffit.
That was a pretty dumb thing to do. The manager gave you the stock answer that he *had* to give you, saying anything else may create a liability for the company. What actually happens when you are laid off depends on how trustworthy you are, it depends on your rapport with management. You just destroyed any that you had. You also moved yourself higher up on the list of people to lay off since you are now considered more of a liability if tough times occur.
I survived numerous layoffs at one employer. When I was laid off I was given two months notice and spent part of that time pairing up with a surviving employee to finish off some features/bugs fixes and getting the survivor familiar with my part of our project. I asked for permission to take home a copy of some of the source code that I had worked on all alone so that if anyone had questions I could use it as a reference when giving them assistance over the phone. My manager did not laugh at my offer, and by my departure the VP of Engineering for the US division of this multinational gave me a letter permitting me to retain the source code for this purpose. Incidentally, they never needed to call, the source code comments were good enough. I'm not saying everyone at this company was treated this way, or that others companies will behave this way, but I am saying that your attitude has created a self fulfilling prophesy where you have assured that you will never receive such consideration.
Also note my experience with getting advanced notice of being laid off is not unique, various other posters are sharing similar experiences.
My local Blockbuster carries both HDDVD and BlueRay. A couple of weeks ago I asked the guys behind the counter what customers were more interested in, they agreed that it was about 3:1 in favor of HD. Personally I think it is too early to declare a winner. PS/3's "recent" introduction may cause a spike in demand. HDDVD folks may be buying more slowly now that the novelty has worn off, and this will happen with the BlueRay "newcomers" too.
I've had to go through this procedure after a simple re-install, when I haven't made any changes to my PC whatsoever. I was under the impression that re-activation was only not automatic when you had made a major hardware change.
If you reinstalled how does that new installation know the key has been previously activated? The new installation is probably not aware of its past life.
"Yahoo was under fire for recently turning over information to Chinese authorities"
"Microsoft was attacked for removing pages from MSN Spaces China at the behest of the government"
"Google was being criticized for removing political sites from search results displayed to China"
"Cisco was accused of helping to enable Chinese filtering of the Web"
This is a poor list. Turning over identifies and removing/filtering content are vastly different activities. You trivialize the former by lumping it in with the later.
You know what is amazing is that I can use any browser with my bank's online banking software. So I can use any operating system. So I can use any random computer anywhere (friend's, work, library, random internet kiosk at the breckenridge ski resort up on the mountain) And that I never considered that amazing before today.
Perhaps I'm paranoid, but I find it amazing that you would use a random computer to do online banking. Who knows what key logging software has been maliciously installed.
[joke] :-)
ermmm, except that in 1968 Wal-Mart was a 2 year old company that existed only in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Any store that sold a 12 button calculator, working time piece and accepted "metaly money" was a technological giant.
[/joke]
Yeah, I had to re-read the text when I ran across this:
"In 1969, Wal-Mart installed a computer to keep track of inventory in its Bentonville, Arkansas, distributon facility. This initial system evolved into a perpetual inventory-control system, and by the end of the 1970s, Wal-Mart had installed a computer terminal network throughout the United States to link its headquarters, stores, and distribution centers."
"Value Disciplines: 3 Case Examples", Haim Mendelson, Stanford, Graduate School or Business, June 2003, pp 1-30.
"But I thought Starcraft worked on Mac too..."
It's called World of Warcraft...
I don't think you realize the popularity of Starcrft in South Korea. It's almost a national sport, there are multiple cable TV channels that show tournaments live with play-by-play commentators.
"Knowing what we know about CIOs -- that is, that most are smart, hardworking, ...
... supremely aware of how the business works ...
... and increasingly savvy regarding the workings of external customers' minds ...
... the failure of more CIOs to become CEO has to be one of the biggest mysteries of our age."
No argument there.
No, they are supremely aware of how one segment of the business works. An important segment, but still a limited view.
No, that would probably be sales/marketing or operations depending on the nature of the business.
I'd suggest pondering a company that has been an aggressive and pioneering user of IT since 1969, Wal-Mart. Despite being one of the most consistently successful firms with respect to IT, their long term strategy has been that IT is a temporary assignment. That managers are "merchants first", something else secondarily. Now a side effect of this is perhaps to spread IT knowledge throughout management.
I would argue that business success is largely based upon stategy, and IT is more of an implementor of stategy, not as much a formulator of strategy. IT skills are valuable, but being a people-person, a motivator, a leader, is critical for a CEO. I'd wager that if we took a close look at those CIOs who rose to CEOs we would find a lot of experience outside of IT. One long term stategy for becoming a CEO is to take stretch assignment outside of one's comfort zone, to work in more than one discipline within the company. I expect that CIO was merely the last such assignment, not that someone spent an entire career in IT and became CEO.
Or perhaps this is Microsoft's way of getting their hands on a fairly mature, well-known, linux distribution. MS is not known for what they invent, they're known for what they usurp and rebrand.
No Linux distribution is well known among the public. You are lucky if you can find someone who has heard of Linux in general.
If Microsoft wanted a *NIX they could do the same thing that Sun, SGI, and more recently Apple had done. Just use BSD. Very few users will care if the underpinnings of a *NIX based OS is Linux or BSD. The user will care about the apps, and possibly compatibility with legacy apps. Now Microsoft has some inherent advantages in that regard, far outweighing anything Linux/BSD related, something that could possibly make them a dominant *NIX vendor.
I suppose Walmart wants a stable 100% OS to run their system on ...
Wal-Mart installed UNIX-based systems in their stores in 1991. They use common systems and platforms in all their stores world wide. From an IT perspective Wal-Mart has been a pioneering and aggressive user of technology since 1969.
Note: Dell does not support non-Dell installed operating systems. In short: "We won't even give you tech support for the FreeDOS that comes in the package. All we'll do is replace your hardware if it breaks."
That sounds like support to me. They support what they assembled/installed. Dell support is not a uniform thing, it varies quite a bit from product to product and segment to segment. Give them more money, they will give you more support. Give them even more and they'll send someone to your home/office. Give them alot of money and they'll help you setup your enterprise with custom software and help you keep it running.
Has anyone figured out how much cheaper these computers come than those with OEM Windows? Dell's pricing/models are so scattered I don't even know where to begin.
Why don't you begin by determining what segment these "blank" systems come from, "home / home office", "small business", etc; and then look at comparable "bootable" systems in that same segment. Staying withing the segment helps to make Dell prices a little more comprehensible. When you go between segments there can be radical changes in things that "geeks" sometimes ignore, warranties for example.
My vague recollection from other sources is that Dell charges something around US$50 for Windows XP.
You have the source code for your BIOS?
When I used a genuine IBM PC back in the day, yes, IBM published the complete source code to BIOS. The listing was *the* API reference.
... I love the way all pundits are smarter than jobs, yet the company's track record is amazing (I'm a stock holder since the 90s) ...
... Holding Apple stock since the 90s suggest a naive investor, taking profits periodically and perhaps repurchasing after a correction that follows a wave of speculation would suggest more sophistication. Apple's stock price incorporates a lot of speculation, Apple may live up to it but that is in part due to failures amongst Apple's competitors, something beyond Apple's control. For example, Apple is more of a digital music player company than a computer company in the eyes of investors. If a competitor were able to introduce a viable iPod competitor, not necessarily better - just competitive, Apple's stock could easily crash.
Being an Apple stockholder is not necessarily a sign of good judgment. It may be a sign of faith, not good analysis. First let me emphasize that stock price is not based on a firm's health, at time there is more speculation than analysis. Apple will undoubtedly be healthy for the foreseeable future and have the cash reserves to finance any necessary adaptations to changing market conditions, however the stock price could easily come crashing down despite good sales. Witness $90 to $80 in December, $70 to $50 in July, $85 to $60 in March,
So where is the piracy hurting that economic sector? I can not see it.
Maybe 5/10 games being of the more casual type, casual gamers being less likely to pirate?
Also, MMORGS are somewhat piracy resistant due to subscriptions.
However most important of all is that this is just a sorted list, piracy affects absolute numbers. Rampant piracy would not mean the there is no top ten, just that the total sales numbers are depressed. It would also be interesting to compare absolute numbers of a subscription based MMORG to the other titles that don't have the piracy resistance. Discrepancies there might reflect piracy to some degree.
It may be cheaper to send robotic missions, but probably not as much fun. For a race serious about exploring a significant fraction of the galaxy ...
... I doubt if the manned vs unmanned costs are an issue driving the choice of exploration method.
I'll refer to my second sentence: "Then if anything interesting is found send the "manned" missions." Do you realize how much nothing is out there, where is the "fun" in finding another dead rock just like so many others? Forget the romantic fantasy of spaceflight, it will be uncomfortable, boring, and stressful. With robots doing the scouting there will be a greater number of interesting things for the manned missions to investigate, possible more than could be sent out. Now if manned missions did the initial exploration, the people would largely see nothing of particular interest. I think you are vastly overestimating the novelty of finding another dead rock in space, sure it would interest us, but a generation born after such discoveries become commonplace?
Actually it is a major point of debate, scientists favoring a large number of robotic missions, politicians favoring a handful of manned missions. Manned missions are multiple orders of magnitude more expensive.
I'd hold off on criticizing others for a lack of imagination. Don't you realize that self replicating probes will doom us? We will be galactic spammers, the aliens will wipe us out as a nuisance. Or our probes will harvest the planet they pray towards, the aliens will wipe us out as heretics and blasphemers. At a very minimum the probes will be crossing the border without proper documentation, the fines and impound fees could leave us in "debtors prison" for millennia.
I read some of it and the biggest assumption was that probes would travel at most 1/10 the speed of light.
Well there is the problem of fuel needed to accelerate, and decelerate if you want to stop/slow to look at something interesting. Perhaps a decent strategy would be to send fast movers out to scout, never stop/slow - accelerate only, and have them signal slow movers behind to investigate more interesting things.
We will be in a lot of trouble if the Cylons find us first.
Actually the "cylons" will find us first, it is far cheaper to send robotic explorers out. Then if anything interesting is found send the "manned" missions.
if you're just a voice on concalls and a name on emails, what do you expect? You got to have at least some face time.
In such a case one has to wonder if the position could just be off-shored? Telecommuting may be a proof-of-concept that a position does not really require personal interaction. If so, why not have a long-distance telecommute rather than a local?
Actually, you are overstating the work which the drug companies engage in. Most of the research is done in academia, under federal funding.
I believe that was the case many decades ago, but I don't think things have worked that way in modern times. Universities like to own patents too, it is a revenue stream for them as well. The work in academia may be more likely to be funded by industry than the feds.
None of that happened with the shuttle.
There are two shuttles losses, Columbia in 2003 and Challenger in 1986. In 1986 there was a little excitement among Democrats that they might be able to pin the blame for launching on Reagan. Political behavior has deteriorated since then, and it wasn't all that high in 1986 to begin with.
NASA was paralyzed after Challenger, not just Columbia, probably more paralyzed. Contrast these two with the Apollo 1 fire.
...
Regarding political opportunism, I think your post exemplifies the modern tendency to do so. *Every* administration views the space program as a status symbol, and both parties have supported the Air Force's desire to militarize space. With respect to risky missions to Mars, *all* missions to Mars are currently risky and given that they are robotic that is not too much of an issue. Their is something worth considering in a "faster cheaper" strategy, faster learning curve, risks can be somewhat managed through redundancy,
What, repeating vintage 1969 American technology is beyond the reach of 2007 Japan, even though what it has to do to land a person on the Moon is now proven, and the equipment has 30 years of further development?
It's not the tech, it's the human factor. Today, the Apollo landings would be considered too risky, too hazardous for the crew. Back then we would mourn the loss, but essentially say the astronauts volunteered and they knew the risks. Especially given their military and test pilot backgrounds. Today there would be too many political opportunists and lawyers trying to exploit the tragedy, and planners are thus paralyzed by fear, or at best overly cautious.
If you can't figure out why a mother of three is ineligible for the Darwin Awards, I think you may need to climb out of the gene pool yourself.
;-)
Since you failed to narrow the "mother" category to "post-menopausal mother" I think you may have some climbing to do as well.